Unknown vs State Cadre Forest Officers ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2749 AP

             HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: C.R.P.No.210 of 2020

                                 PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.
                                           ORDER

No      DATE
                                                                         Transfer
18.   24.06.2022   CPK,J & Dr.KMR,J                                      re-d to
                                                                         I/O
                                 Review I.A.No.1 of 2022                 folder
                                                                         before

The present interlocutory application came to be correcti on filed seeking review of the order dated 17.02.2022

passed in C.R.P.No.210 of 2020, wherein this Court

while setting aside the order impugned therein,

remanded the matter back to National Company Law

Tribunal (NCLT), Amaravati, for deciding the issue

afresh after hearing all the concerned by taking into

consideration the order passed by the Board for

Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the present review application is filed mainly on the

ground that even on remand, there is no material for

the NCLT to come to a different conclusion and that

there are no pleadings to that effect. Hence, requests

to review the order.

We are not inclined to accept the request made

by the petitioner. If really, the petitioner is

aggrieved by the order under review, he could have

challenged the same before the Higher Court. Apart

from that, a perusal of the order under review would

show that the matter was remanded back to the

NCLT, in view of the fact that the order passed by

BIFR was not taken into consideration by NCLT while

holding that the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was within the

period of limitation. Since there is a dispute with

regard to the said order being placed before the NCLT

and as the NCLT has not considered the said aspect,

this Court thought it fit to remand the matter back to

the NCLT for deciding the issue afresh by taking into

consideration the order passed by the BIFR, if placed

on record. The said order cannot be found fault with.

Further, in view of the judgments of the Apex

Court in Haridas Das v. Usha Rani Banik1, Gopal

Singh V. State Cadre Forest Officers Association2,

Ram Sahu (dead) through LRs and others V. Vinod

Kumar Rawat and others3 and in Ku. A. Prabhavathi,

W.G. Vs. The State of A.P. Revenue Department

[I.A.No.6 of 2018 in W.P.No.16450 of 2004]

[decided on 08.11.2019]] of this Court, wherein the

principles relating to scope of review and also as to

when a review can be ordered are laid down, and

following the same the present review application

cannot be considered and the same is liable to be

dismissed.

Having regard to the above, this review petition

is dismissed.

___________ CPK, J

__________ Dr.KMR, J Pab

(2006) 4 SCC 78

2007) 9 SCC 369

2020 SCC Online SC 896